I had a better way of articulating it, but I went with that.
So for the longest time I felt like I shouldn’t give people reasons behind an answer because you can put in the reasons behind it can sway their decisions. Also I know that I had incomplete data set. Humans do lean on each other to think and you can inject what idea and have it spread.
To attempt something more coherent. You can do propaganda when you try to reason. It’s just natural to talk as if they know and just bridge the gaps in their knowledge with any old phrase
(edit: sent mid sentence on accident)
Every interaction between humans is manipulation. Every single one - including not saying something.
With that framing: Your question sounds to me about the negative connotation (“being manipulative”) - and for me that’s simple: sincerity and intent.
Before coming to your last paragraph I go with an extreme as example, abuse, because it’s so black and white:
I try to convince you to leave your abusive partner. I try to alter your whole life - because I’m convinced that it’s the right thing for you.
If I tell you the same thing to get off with your current partner or to harm you, it’s manipulative.
Now for your example: For me it’s the foundation of our human interaction to bridge gaps - social, communicative, personal.
We always have incomplete data sets (if only about the perception, interpretation and knowledge of the other people around us). We’re always in an interpretation gap.
Now if you withhold information other humans are worse off, even ignoring what other people call “the objective truth”: they don’t know where you stand, what your reasoning is and what values you hold. All of this shines through even when just saying, as a random example, “I don’t want bacon” - this can be health, religion, mood, taste and a miryad of other things related that will help other people connect (or avoid) you.
In short: don’t break other people’s heads! Every human needs to evaluate information they get - as long as you’re sincere and don’t try to evoke a behavior that you know is against the best of your surrounding you wouldn’t fall into “manipulative” in my book.
I disagree with this, it’s overly broadening the definition. If you’re upfront and clear with someone, for example saying “your partner is abusive, with these exact examples”, that’s not manipulation because it’s not underhanded or subtle. It’s just trying to help. I don’t think we have a good word in English for “changing someone’s mind or behaviour” in a neutral or positive way. At least I’m not remembering it right now. Maybe persuade?
For it to be manipulation you would have to be sneaky about it. I’m not a manipulative person so it’s hard to think of examples but something like, making it seem like their current partner is cheating on them via clever wordplay and deliberate clues left lying around “by accident”. Even if the end goal is good, the method is manipulative and clandestine. Honesty is the difference here. In the first example we were upfront and clear with our intentions and beliefs.
I get where you’re coming from:
I gave the foundational definition of “manipulation” - as in “manipulate the lever”, to change the state of something - The reason I started with it is simple: I don’t want readers to assume the choice is between “not manipulating” by not interacting. Remember that the OP used “manipulation m” and “altering perspective” basically synonymous in their post - that’s why it was important to me to relate to that part.
In another context I’d start closer to what you’ve described! :)
Oh yeah I see what you mean now. My bad for misreading it